Yes another trans thread

[NewMummy579]

I'm struggling to understand this documentary I'm watching on catch up called sex map of Britain 'the pregnant dad'. Two trans men in a relationship one of which is pregnant. He is having a home birth to avoid pronouns in the hospital and being wrongly identifies as 'she' or 'her' and struggling with body image now he has a pregnant belly.

If you are born female but believe you are in the wrong body and transition to live as a Male, surely it's not being unreasonable to expect that you therefore do not partake in female biological acts like pregnancy and giving birth??

The couple are quoted as saying 'oh one of us had to delay hormone treatment and bite the bullet in getting pregnant if we wanted to have a family'. If you both identify as a male couple then why not adopt as many gay couples do and give a child a good home?

After the baby is born, they refer to 'chest feeding' instead of breast feeding and say it's ridiculous when he needs to be put on the birth certificate as 'mother' since they gave birth, rather than as 2 fathers.

I'm perhaps being unreasonable and openly don't understand all aspects of this complicated gender topic but I'm seeing it a bit like having your cake and eating it - you either either identify/live as one sex or another and not both when it suits circumstance?

see, I knew transwomen of old for whom this would have been impossible because the body dysmorphia would simply not have allowed it. They would have never even have wanted it. It would have been an anathema

That should have read 'the equivalent of this if there is one'. I don't know any FtMs of old.

Wombs? Same place they get hearts, lungs, kidneys, corneas...

Samphire - your aggressive post is the very reason I was hesitant to post this. Do not say so fucking what and label me as homo or transphobic when I'm merely trying to understand and have an adult discussion/debate where all views are welcome. I also went on to say regardless of the situation how difficult it must for people dealing with such issues.

Well, I think you are grabbing everything I posted as meaning YOU... it didn't. I did NOT label you anything!

As for SO FUCKING WHAT? I don't think that is particularly aggressive in AIBU! And it did express my frustrations with the increasingly blurred line between people who just want to transition and live their lives, with however many hurdles they wish to overcome, and those who want to transition and change everyone elses lives.

Spartacus I have name changed recently - that and am staying out of most of the Feminist boards, keeping to trans threads in AIBU

I to know transwomen of old for whom being forced through puberty was traumatising, so I know what you mean. But the basic premise is that there has to be a balance between freedom of choice and blanket condemnation - or we all do start to sound a tad TERFy!

That's one of the reasons I have stepped out of Feminist boards for a while. I feel the need to recalibrate my incipient TERFdom against the reality of my trans friends.

There would be literally no point in having Mother and Father on birth certificates anymore if this couple were allowed to both be validated recorded as two fathers.

That's an extreme case, but most plastic surgery, or cosmetic surgery, takes place in a patriarchal society that embraces particular standards of beauty. This raises questions about 'free choice' for a start.

Oh, I agree entirely, YetAnother, but the world is full of people doing things I think stupid for reasons I think are terrible, and tied to patriarchal norms. (See, for example a thousand posts on "I took my husband's name when I married out of my OWN FREE WILL".) There comes a time when I think "you do you" and let people get on with it if it pleases them, and only call it out when they try to bring me in on it as well.

There was that bloke who had really extensive surgery and tattooing to look like a cat - whisker implants, dentistry, the lot. (I think he's died since.) Cats don't generally pay council tax, but I bet he had to pay council tax.

Just because you want to be something, and can create an approximation of it in your own mind, doesn't mean everyone else has to agree that this is what you, in fact, are.

I to know transwomen of old for whom being forced through puberty was traumatising, so I know what you mean. But the basic premise is that there has to be a balance between freedom of choice and blanket condemnation - or we all do start to sound a tad TERFy

I can't place you from the FWR boards at all or even guess at your old name.

I guess I'd ask whether it is about 'freedom of choice' and whether this should be counterpoised with blanket condemnation (and I'm not sure what you mean there) or with responsible medical ethics.

I don't think there is a binary between 'freedom of choice' and 'condemnation'. I think there is a space in between and this is usually seen to be filled by those for whom surgical transition (which we know is traumatic, carries a high degree of risk and is not always productive of good results anyway) is really a last resort. I think too that we expect trans women to accept that they are not biological women and not to behave like India Willoughby.

But a lot about the case that the OP mentions makes me go 'come on' to be honest.

Puberty is and always has been highly traumatising for large numbers of girls all over the world, for a variety of reasons. The results of this are extensive as well.

Boys too probably but less so.

That's why I said a balance between the two... IW and their ilk are just the kind of happenstance that will always upset that balance, make fairly clear and fair minded individuals become more set for or against one idea or the other - I think that is my fear, that blanket condemnation will be the overwhelming backlash, once all this trans/terf war is over, resolved, imploded...

... I am almost more afraid of what comes after than I am of how far the pressure to change yet more laws, more social mores will push! I really wouldn't want to live in a New Puritannical World. But I suspect that is what will l come next and it will be as harsh as the current Neo Liberalism is.

That you can't place me is a good thing, I think. I have done a lot of work on getting rid of my hitherto utterly pedantic, Miss Manners, style. I am trying to relax into old age

"If they were 2 men wanting to father children before transitioning I would feel the same. Good for you, your personal choice, crack on!"

It's not the same at all.

Two men wanting to father children before transitioning would need to get women to carry the children and give birth to them and then give them to the couple.

With this couple, they've just needed some semen which is a substance not difficult to get hold of eg some men freely donate to girls on public transport.

I find making an equivalent between a man ejaculating and a woman going through birth and pregnancy, incredibly minimising of the female experience here.

That's not a surprise - a lot of the conversation around this minimises and makes assumptions around female people automatically giving up their bodies parts / growing babies and then handing them off.

This part is very revealing of the mindset, ideas about who is important, and minimising female labour (literally).

Also for me - I didn't see the prog - and am generally not keen on point and stare stuff.

It's not the same at all Of course the biology is different, I am not stupid, human males are not seahorses

I wasn't minimising anything, that is the sort of daft knee jerk'ism I am becoming more and more irritated with.

I meant and wrote that if 2 adult humans of the same sex want to give thought to having genetically related progeny prior to gender reassignment procedures that would make it impossible, then I have no issue with that!

I take issue with all the twaddle that surrounds it... but the act, nope! Not really.

Samphire - I think we are talking cross purposes.

That's why I said a balance between the two... IW and their ilk are just the kind of happenstance that will always upset that balance, make fairly clear and fair minded individuals become more set for or against one idea or the other - I think that is my fear, that blanket condemnation will be the overwhelming backlash, once all this trans/terf war is over, resolved, imploded...

I'm not so much on about this as I am about medical ethics - 'freedom of choice' (of the patient, positioned as a 'client' who can buy medical services and/or as a person for whatever reason asking for medical/surgical intervention and responsible provision of service. Should it be about 'free choice' - or are there other issues at stake?

I haven't seen the documentary but, just from what you've posted, I think YABU and don't have any issue with what this couple are doing.

I'm usually very much on the peak-trans/'TERF' side of any trans argument - don't think you can change sex, think gender dysphoria is a mental illness, don't think bio men should be in women's spaces/sports etc.

But these guys aren't hurting anyone else? They're living in a loving relationship they're both happy with, dressing and identifying how they want to personally and making use of their biological bodies to have a child they both want. Why should they adopt if they don't want to? They have the ability to create a child so they should have the free choice to use it. I don't see why it hurts anyone it they're named as fathers on the bc either, tbh.

Also agree with a pp who said dysphoria can be coped with to achieve something you really want or for the sake of someone else. I have anorexia and, after a real scare with my first baby, I ate properly and gained weight for my second and third pregnancies. I found it mentally very very difficult indeed and relapsed again after they were born - but I still did it. I imagine it's the same thing for this pregnant transman.

"I meant and wrote that if 2 adult humans of the same sex want to give thought to having genetically related progeny prior to gender reassignment procedures that would make it impossible, then I have no issue with that!

I take issue with all the twaddle that surrounds it... but the act, nope! Not really."

The assumption that women will be available to carry and birth these babies concerns me. The assumption that if it is ever possible to graft baby growing and birthing organs into male bodies, that said organs will somehow just be available.

Men must always have what they want, is the bottom line here.

This is getting into surrogacy which is a massive women's rights issue.

I didn't bring it up though.

manicinsomniac what about their child? Won't that child be somewhat confused by having two women raise them who are both pretending to be men? Who obviously have a lot of self hatred?

But with anorexia I bet you didn’t say call me fat and people agreed to it.
This couple are insisting society ignore their disphoria. That makes no sense to me. And that with anorexia you’re expected to receive psychiatric help to get you over the disphoria instead of being told actually you’re right it’s ok to feel fat forever and not deal with the underlying issues that are making you think this way?

I think children are pretty flexible and they probably won't have any more issues than a child being born into a family with other extreme / non mainstream beliefs e.g. around religion or the environment or something.

The surgical intervention part is always a worry of course, although families that have odd beliefs can fuck you up in ways that aren't visible.

Like I say I haven't seen it, I'd think the main issue these kids will face is other kids taking the piss out of them, that's always been the way though.

joystir - maybe, yes. But, idk if that's really the issue under discussion here is it? The solution others were offering (apols if I didn't read the thread carefully enough) was that they should be adopting instead - but an adopted child isn't going to be any less confused by their family situation than a bio one would.

And also, don't we all have the potential to confuse and mess up our children in our own different ways? I'm mentally ill. Maybe I shouldn't have had children? Some parents are disabled in a way that impacts their children. Some parents are same sex couples which could also be said to be confusing for a child. Some parents have huge self hatred and self esteem issues. Some parents hate each other. Some parents even seem to hate their children. We can't start looking into other people's relationships and saying, 'you two are okay to have a child but you two aren't.'

(btw I am NOT saying that mentally ill, disabled, gay or any other minority group of people should not have children!! Just that, if it's okay to say that a trans couple shouldn't, where would it end and why single trans people out?)

The treatment for anorexia is not to say 'yes, you are a fat munter' and give the person liposuction. Even if an anorexia sufferer was suicidal because they hated their body so much, nobody would ever give treatment in that way.

So why is the treatment for gender dysphoria to tell them 'yes, you are the sex you wish to be' (and expect everyone else to collude in that lie) pump them full of hormones and mutilate perfectly healthy breasts and genitals?

But with anorexia I bet you didn’t say call me fat and people agreed to it

No, true. But I do expect to be treated in the same way as everyone else by society in general and not to have my choices/illnesses criticised by those who don't know me well or aren't professionals treating me.

I'm not saying these women are men. I believe they're women. But I also believe that it's up to them how they live their own personal lives.

But I also believe that it's up to them how they live their own personal lives

Are there limits on that? Not for the women concerned, but for people in general (in relation to there being medical and surgical interventions necessary in order to facilitate this)?

Samphire - I think we are talking cross purposes. Quite possibly I do agree with you about the medical ethics... the current, apparent 'fad' for gender fluidity leading to surgery coupled with 'surgery for sale' is quite terrifying. It already was as far as purely cosmetic surgery goes... thinking of people like Pete Burns, for instance.

The assumption that women will be available to carry and birth these babies concerns me. The assumption that if it is ever possible to graft baby growing and birthing organs into male bodies, that said organs will somehow just be available.

Men must always have what they want, is the bottom line here.

I don't care to dive quite so deeply into such a dystopian future. I read enough fictional dystopian work and find that the possible reality is far more scary!

But, again where it is a matter of choice (not where it is a matter of cold hard cash, of course)? Would it bother you as much if it were a sister of one partner and the semen of the other? And surrogacy was the flip side of this couples choices... it is only right to consider all possibilities. Especially if the result is a new set of restrictive laws to counter / reverse previously liberal ones.

I apologise for my fence sitting. But I am trying to understand my personal Peak Trans in light of current happenings in my real life!

The theory and reality are currently not gelling at all well!

Spartacus - Yes! I was just talking about this situation. In general, I think if the personal, social or financial effect on others is significant or negative then it should no longer be your own free choice to do as you wish.